The assumption here is that all the legal requirements for a rape conviction have been met. It is established that the man has had sex with the woman without consent. The question is then: should any of the above circumstances exonerate the man and either get him off the charge or result in a reduced sentence, as a general principle?

Google AdSenseGuest Advertisement

None of the above choice since there are those which are below and in the middle of everything. Rape needs different attitudes to it, as there so many situations where rape is a crime and it is not, for it is not rape at all yet condemned as rape by the society so blind to the truth.

Google AdSenseGuest Advertisement

Woman was drunk at the time (i.e. got herself drunk).
Woman at no time clearly said "No" to sex.
Woman was in a relationship with the rapist at the time.
Woman was married to the rapist.

In regards to drunkenness: So long as she is not actively fighting to not have sex with you, or isn't passed out, and is just simply drunk, there is no "rape" whatsoever. Rape is forced sexual activity. Being drunk does not count as "forced". People can make decisions as to who they want to have sex with - and might even initiated sexual contact - when drunk. That they might regret it later matters not. One can be sober and regret it later.

If a woman never says "no" to sex, and presumably isn't fighting back, then again there is no rape. If you do not show that you are not consenting to the activity, there is no way to judge it as rape!

Assuming that the relationship is all ready sexual, the woman in said relationship cannot rightfully proclaim rape if the activity is not violent. If she just didn't want to and he pushed it on her and was not harmed and could have theoretically stopped it if she took the time to leave, that isn't rape.

In marriage, one is essentially supposed to be sexually available to your partner. It is thus very hard to claim that any time one can be raped properly in this situation. Whether one is abused is another thing, but technically, there is no rape when sexual availability is construed as part of the deal.

I'd also add that sexy/revealing clothing, promiscuity (past and present), flirtation, and past sex with the rapist, whilst not taking away from its categorization as rape (presuming it meets that categorization) does place some of the blame for provoking the act on the woman. That is to say, we cannot say that a woman who is basically begging for sexual attention is not partially to blame for bringing herself into a position where she is raped. Also, I see very little reason to care about being raped (presuming one is not harmed in the act) if one is promiscious unless one is currently in a relationship.

Accepting all terms of rape, just cause the woman says "I was raped" means that women will gain power to take down anyone who they please, regardless whether the person has done anything at all.
Imagine having such power? well...you dont have to...if you are a woman.
But there's GOD that sees everything and knows the real truth of what happened? isnt there GOD? is there GOD that knows what really happened that night? what if noone will know the truth? than so many get condmned for something they have not done.

and women got actor skills...they can cry and make any heart sink for them.

James i voted none of the above, but there would be one exception with me, if i was on a plane & it was about to crash, i would get a quick kiss of the most beutiful passenger, with or without consent, likewise if a meteorite was a hour from destroying earth, i am afraid rape would be a option for me.

So imminent death is a option you should have, as most would do the craziest things when death approaches.

If it was really rape, there is no excuse. But if I were on a jury, I'd be very skeptical of any claims of date rape and, in the absence of physical evidence, would consider all the factors above.

Click to expand...

it is so easy to fake rape. She takes out her hands...all covered with blue spots...and scratches...which she, while she cries and gazes with tears with her deep blue eyes at the judge, got when she was raped. And in truth...she beat herself up for the sake of putting this guy in jail, who did not like her.

Oh wait...another scenario. The guy's got money? ok no prob. let me get him into bed than in the middle of him in the girl, the girl tells him to stop, he of course cant because he is about to get to climax...but accidently her gf records everything and the sound as well, just for fun, they then use this during trial to make everything look like a rape. the guy gets to pay 2 million for the girl who suffered.

Really?
So if you see a woman wearing revealing clothes, it'd be ok to rape her?

Click to expand...

no it would not be ok to rape her because she is a slut. However if she does gets raped the government must not protect her, for she brought this evil unto her self, so when she does say that she was raped, the government must not condemn it as a rape.

Woman was drunk at the time (i.e. got herself drunk).
Woman at no time clearly said "No" to sex.
Woman was in a relationship with the rapist at the time.
Woman was married to the rapist.

Click to expand...

Those are precisely the choices that I considered. But then I removed two.

In regards to drunkenness: So long as she is not actively fighting to not have sex with you, or isn't passed out, and is just simply drunk, there is no "rape" whatsoever.

Click to expand...

I think that the deciding factor for the severity of the action would be whether the girl indicated that she did not want sex with the accused... so I left this unticked as it is covered by the "clearly said No" option.All else being equal, drunkenness doesn't mitigate. If anything, it makes it worse because the girl is at a disadvantage.
If the accused is drunk on the other hand, that could be a different story.

If a woman never says "no" to sex, and presumably isn't fighting back, then again there is no rape. If you do not show that you are consenting to the activity, there is no way to judge it as rape!

Click to expand...

I agree with this. The devil would be in the details of course, but generally speaking the more clear it was made that sex with the accused was not desired, the more serious the crime.
I don't know if I'd go as far as saying that it wasn't rape at all unless the girl presented a clear message that she did desire sex with the accused.

Assuming that the relationship is all ready sexual, the woman in said relationship cannot rightfully proclaim rape if the activity is not violent. If she just didn't want to and he pushed it on her and was not harmed and could have theoretically stopped it if she took the time to leave, that isn't rape.

Click to expand...

I agree that it could potentially mitigates, but with reservations. I don't think it would mitigate the severity of the crime in all situations. I definitely don't agree that it necessarily makes the action not rape at all.

In marriage, one is essentially supposed to be sexually available to your partner. It is thus very hard to claim that any time one can be raped properly in this situation. Whether one is abused is another thing, but technically, there is no rape when sexual availability is construed as part of the deal.

Click to expand...

I disagree on this one. I did tick it initially, but after consideration decided that it is the relationship that counts, not the state of marriage. If a couple are married, but not in a relationship (eg separated but not divorced), then the crime is not mitigated.

In the religious address on adultery to about 500 worshippers in Sydney last month, Sheik Hilali said: "If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it ... whose fault is it, the cats or the uncovered meat?

There can never ever be a mitigating circumstance in a rape. A woman can never contribute to her rape. By clicking for any of the above, you absolve the rapist and basically blame the woman which in my opinion, makes you just as bad as the rapist.

Shame on you for even suggesting that her manner of dress, whether she is drunk or not, if she's in a relationship with her rapist, date rape, etc.. as though it should somehow count to determine whether she has been raped or not. A woman has a right to not be raped. It is because of people like YOU that women are raped and that they are then scared to come forward to report it. You people honestly turn my stomach. And you dare refer to yourselves as somehow educated? You are nothing but pathetic wretches and animals for some of the comments made in this thread.

There can never ever be a mitigating circumstance in a rape. A woman can never contribute to her rape. By clicking for any of the above, you absolve the rapist and basically blame the woman which in my opinion, makes you just as bad as the rapist.

Shame on you for even suggesting that her manner of dress, whether she is drunk or not, if she's in a relationship with her rapist, date rape, etc.. as though it should somehow count to determine whether she has been raped or not. A woman has a right to not be raped. It is because of people like YOU that women are raped and that they are then scared to come forward to report it. You people honestly turn my stomach. And you dare refer to yourselves as somehow educated? You are nothing but pathetic wretches and animals for some of the comments made in this thread.

Click to expand...

Scenario 1: it is so easy to fake rape. She takes out her hands...all covered with blue spots...and scratches...which she, while she cries and gazes with tears with her deep blue eyes at the judge, got when she was raped. And in truth...she beat herself up for the sake of putting this guy in jail, who did not like her.

Scenario 2: Oh wait...another scenario. The guy's got money? ok no prob. let me get him into bed than in the middle of him in the girl, the girl tells him to stop, he of course cant because he is about to get to climax...but accidently her gf records everything and the sound as well, just for fun, they then use this during trial to make everything look like a rape. the guy gets to pay 2 million for the girl who suffered.

the evil within women and men is the same, the cover which that evil bears is different thou for women and men.

I condemn rape, but it must have sufficient proof that it really was forced rape and not what the woman decides whever she wishes.

I'd also add that sexy/revealing clothing, promiscuity (past and present), flirtation, and past sex with the rapist, whilst not taking away from its categorization as rape (presuming it meets that categorization) does place some of the blame for provoking the act on the woman. That is to say, we cannot say that a woman who is basically begging for sexual attention is not partially to blame for bringing herself into a position where she is raped. Also, I see very little reason to care about being raped (presuming one is not harmed in the act) if one is promiscious unless one is currently in a relationship.

Click to expand...

The problem with this is that "begging for sexual attention" should not be judged by the person's attire or past. Unless they have a t-shirt that says "I'm begging for sexual attention", I guess.

Flirtation is tricky... when I think "flirtation", I don't think "begging for sex", but it's a broad term.

The problem with this is that "begging for sexual attention" should not be judged by the person's attire or past. Unless they have a t-shirt that says "I'm begging for sexual attention", I guess.

Click to expand...

women use everything as a tool, theyr body is a weapon which they use for a common goal, everything on her is a tool to gain control over others. Women posses such power and it cannot be denied since men fell for the sex appeal. If the flowers attract the wrong bees...it is the flower's fault and not the bees.